All Photons Move at 300,000km/s.... But Don't?

RajeshTrivedi said:
This is the right statement, that photon has momentum which explains the pressure generated, you can google about Radiation Pressure too. My question is why did you specifically chose to associate motion of Photon with PEE ?

And I do not know JCC level of ignorance, but I surely know Paddoboy level of ignorance, yours is terminology level knowledge, very shallow, you are ignorant beyond that. But with this shallow knowledge and complete ignorance on the details, you are able to successfully irritate many posters and making them run away...thats the irony.
Click to expand...

If you say a photon has momentum, presumably you think photons do move, then. Correct?

Yet you seem to think the photo-electric effect can be accounted for without invoking the motion of photons. How do you see that working?

I realise I've already asked you this but you do not seem inclined to respond, in spite of having found time to exchange numerous hostile messages with PB.
 
NNow I'm sure I'm not the only one here who would like the following answered.
The fact remains, you are no Chandra or Eddington or even a cosmologist, correct?
And yet you expect we should all ignore what we read from reputable links, what reputable Professors tell us, and what the majority of the forum accepts, in favour of your cosmologically enlightened view. Is that correct? :)
Give us a yes or a no, and than elaborate if you like.
Don't be shy. It's a genuine concern of a few here I suggest.
 
Rajesh, please answer exchemist and paddo's questions.

(Psst, paddo, it's exchemist not EXOchemist btw.)
 
exchemist said:
If you say a photon has momentum, presumably you think photons do move, then. Correct?

Yet you seem to think the photo-electric effect can be accounted for without invoking the motion of photons. How do you see that working?

I realise I've already asked you this but you do not seem inclined to respond, in spite of having found time to exchange numerous hostile messages with PB.
Click to expand...

Since you are not aware of exchange between me and paddoboy...The question which Paddoboy should answer, why he specifically chose to link motion of photon with PEE ?
 
RajeshTrivedi said:
Unless Paddoboys' smiley has a differing meaning, the point raised by JCC is valid.

Theoretically almost everything gets the impact of Solar radiation Pressure.

Jcc you can visit the following link to start with.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_sail
Click to expand...
jcc's point was not valid.....it was pure pseudoscience crap.
jcc was inferring the ISS Solar panels and asked why it doesn't move the ISS :rolleyes:
Solar sails are a different kettle of fish which he was disputing and which you would have been aware of if not for your stupid "paddoboy "agenda.
But still another switcharoo try by yourself to get a point. FAIL Have another go? :)
 
paddoboy said:
jcc's point was not valid.....it was pure pseudoscience crap.
jcc was inferring the ISS Solar panels and asked why it doesn't move the ISS :rolleyes:
Solar sails are a different kettle of fish which he was disputing and which you would have been aware of if not for your stupid "paddoboy "agenda.
But still another switcharoo try by yourself to get a point. FAIL Have another go? :)
Click to expand...

Dishonesty !!
 
Kristoffer said:
Rajesh, please answer exchemist and paddo's questions.

(Psst, paddo, it's exchemist not EXOchemist btw.)
Click to expand...

For a change why don't you ask few questions to your friend Paddoboy, which he claims, they are more regarding science.

[all these 3 points are claimed by him in this thread only]

1. How GR fails at Planck's level ?
2. What is the relationship between motion of Photon and PEE ?
3. Why doesn't he believe that solar panels on the space station are not pushed by solar radiation ?

Then if you still wish that I must answer, I will.
 
Just fucking answer, but since you insist (even though I don't need paddo to clarify).

Paddo, please answer Rajesh's questions (even though they've been answered before).
 
RajeshTrivedi said:
Dishonesty !!
Click to expand...

jcc said:
p=m x v, that's momentum

e=h x frequency, is not momentum, just a theory been accepted by some scientists.

without mass, there would be no momentum.

scientists can invent words and things, such as graviton, photon, gluons, energy levels and orbitals. xxxholes etc.

i am sure some will agree with me.
Click to expand...
paddoboy said:
Ever heard of solar sails? or light sails?
I wonder how they work if photons have no momentum? :rolleyes:
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/tdm/solarsail/#.VYoLWRuqqko

No one will agree with you fool.
Click to expand...
paddoboy said:
Besides the solar sail evidence that photons do have momentum, we also have as mentioned in the paper in my last post, comets and their tails.

So once again jcc is in the poop, but who wants to bet he'll ask the same question again tomorrow, if he is not banned again before then.
Click to expand...
jcc said:
the moon is reflective, the earth is reflective, why not seen any effect?

now is end of June, how do they do? sailed successfully?
Click to expand...
jcc said:
if that's true, the solar panels on the space station should been pushed by sunlight?
Click to expand...


I could now say quite a lot, as this sort of accusations have been going on since I helped invalidate his weird take on cosmology and BNS, but I think I can go to bed now. :)
 
Kristoffer said:
Pot I'd like to introduce Kettle.
Click to expand...

I had ignored you from day 1, you were warned by the Mods also. Your contribution in all the posts which you have made is to make loose comments about others, nothing else. No science, no question, no ideas. Why ? Does it take you anywhere ? Does it give you a school bully type pleasure in making such rude statements, that too when you are not at all referred ? One posting by me, referring you indirectly as 'kid' has boiled you so much, see the unwarranted impact of your non stop insults meted out to others....Hope you got the lesson.
 
Hmm, I have no infractions as far as I'm aware, true I've had one (1) warning that my language was a bit too over the top, but that was when I replied to a, later perma-banned, nutjob.
You're not one that should be talking about rude statements btw.
I might take a bit of pleasure in telling people they're wrong or what they wrote made no sense, that doesn't make me a bully, though.
And I certainly won't take lessons from you, crank.
 
Kristoffer said:
Hmm, I have no infractions as far as I'm aware, true I've had one (1) warning that my language was a bit too over the top, but that was when I replied to a, later perma-banned, nutjob.
You're not one that should be talking about rude statements btw.
I might take a bit of pleasure in telling people they're wrong or what they wrote made no sense, that doesn't make me a bully, though.
And I certainly won't take lessons from you, crank.
Click to expand...

...

No arguments !!
 
Go back to ignoring me, Rajesh, just like the scientific community ignores you.

I don't wanna be your replacement paddo.
 
Another three pages of personal conflict and derogatory comment, with no meat! At least nothing worth digging out of the muck. (Meat = science, in this case.)
 
RajeshTrivedi said:
Since you are not aware of exchange between me and paddoboy...The question which Paddoboy should answer, why he specifically chose to link motion of photon with PEE ?
Click to expand...

No, for the 3rd time, I am asking YOU to explain to me what is wrong with linking the motion of photons with the photoelectric effect.

It is YOU that is calling someone a "dunce" for doing this. And, speaking as a chemist with some knowledge of quantum theory, I do not understand why, because it seems to me to be quite a reasonable thing to do.

I am trying to be open-minded about you, since I do not know you well, but frankly the repeated avoidance of replying directly to me, on a question of science that I am asking you, is starting to give me doubts about your integrity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top